IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/fuzodm/v23y2024i2d10.1007_s10700-023-09416-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comparative study on precision of pairwise comparison matrices

Author

Listed:
  • Bice Cavallo

    (University of Naples Federico II)

  • Jir̆í Mazurek

    (Silesian University in Opava)

  • Jaroslav Ramík

    (Silesian University in Opava)

Abstract

Pairwise comparisons have been a long-standing technique for comparing alternatives/criteria and their role has been pivotal in the development of modern decision-making methods such as the Analytic Hierarchy/Network Process (AHP/ANP), the Best-Worst method (BWM), PROMETHEE and many others. Pairwise comparisons can be performed within several frameworks such as multiplicative, additive and fuzzy representations of preferences, which are particular instances of a more general framework based on Abelian linearly ordered groups. Though multiplicative, additive and fuzzy representations of preferences are widely used in practice, it is unknown whether decision makers are equally precise in the three aforementioned representations when they measure objective data. Therefore, the aim of this paper is to design, carry out and analyse an experiment with over 200 respondents (undergraduate university students) from two countries, Czechia and Italy, to compare precision of the respondents in all three representations. In the experiment, respondents pairwise compared (by approximation) the areas of four geometric figures and then, the imprecision of their assessments was measured by computing the distance with the exact pairwise comparisons. We grouped the respondents in such a way that each participant was allowed to deal with a unique type of representation. The outcomes of the experiment indicate that the multiplicative approach is the most precise.

Suggested Citation

  • Bice Cavallo & Jir̆í Mazurek & Jaroslav Ramík, 2024. "A comparative study on precision of pairwise comparison matrices," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 179-198, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:fuzodm:v:23:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10700-023-09416-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10700-023-09416-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10700-023-09416-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10700-023-09416-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sándor Bozóki & Linda Dezső & Attila Poesz & József Temesi, 2013. "Analysis of pairwise comparison matrices: an empirical research," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 211(1), pages 511-528, December.
    2. Bice Cavallo & Alessio Ishizaka & Maria Grazia Olivieri & Massimo Squillante, 2019. "Comparing inconsistency of pairwise comparison matrices depending on entries," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 70(5), pages 842-850, May.
    3. Bice Cavallo & Alessio Ishizaka, 2023. "Evaluating scales for pairwise comparisons," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 951-965, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cavallo, Bice & Ishizaka, Alessio, 2025. "A comparative study on precision of direct evaluations, the Pairwise Comparisons Method and the Best-Worst Method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    2. Bice Cavallo & Alessio Ishizaka, 2023. "Evaluating scales for pairwise comparisons," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 951-965, June.
    3. Vladimír Bureš & Jiří Cabal & Pavel Čech & Karel Mls & Daniela Ponce, 2020. "The Influence of Criteria Selection Method on Consistency of Pairwise Comparison," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-13, December.
    4. Bice Cavallo, 2019. "Coherent weights for pairwise comparison matrices and a mixed-integer linear programming problem," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 75(1), pages 143-161, September.
    5. Hiroyuki Goto & Shaohua Wang, 2022. "Polyad inconsistency measure for pairwise comparisons matrices: max-plus algebraic approach," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 401-422, March.
    6. Bertsch, Valentin & Hyland, Marie & Mahony, Michael, 2017. "What drives people's opinions of electricity infrastructure? Empirical evidence from Ireland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 472-497.
    7. João Carneiro & Luís Conceição & Diogo Martinho & Goreti Marreiros & Paulo Novais, 2018. "Including cognitive aspects in multiple criteria decision analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 265(2), pages 269-291, June.
    8. Kułakowski, Konrad, 2018. "Inconsistency in the ordinal pairwise comparisons method with and without ties," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 270(1), pages 314-327.
    9. Tarján, Tamás & Veres, Zoltán, 2018. "Szekvenciális fogyasztói termékválasztás döntési kontinuuma [The decision-making continuum of sequential consumer-product choices]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(5), pages 525-550.
    10. Matteo Brunelli, 2017. "Studying a set of properties of inconsistency indices for pairwise comparisons," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 248(1), pages 143-161, January.
    11. Brunelli, Matteo, 2019. "A study on the anonymity of pairwise comparisons in group decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 279(2), pages 502-510.
    12. Kun Chen & Gang Kou & J. Michael Tarn & Yan Song, 2015. "Bridging the gap between missing and inconsistent values in eliciting preference from pairwise comparison matrices," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 235(1), pages 155-175, December.
    13. Paul Thaddeus Kazibudzki, 2016. "An examination of performance relations among selected consistency measures for simulated pairwise judgments," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 244(2), pages 525-544, September.
    14. Gerarda Fattoruso & Maria Grazia Olivieri, 2023. "Checking consistency for Group-PAHP: a case study of tourism facilities in COVID-19 pandemic," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 497-515, October.
    15. Zsombor Szádoczki & Sándor Bozóki & Patrik Juhász & Sergii V. Kadenko & Vitaliy Tsyganok, 2023. "Incomplete pairwise comparison matrices based on graphs with average degree approximately 3," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 326(2), pages 783-807, July.
    16. Ágoston, Kolos Csaba & Csató, László, 2022. "Inconsistency thresholds for incomplete pairwise comparison matrices," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    17. Bice Cavallo & Livia D’Apuzzo, 2020. "Relations between coherence conditions and row orders in pairwise comparison matrices," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 43(2), pages 637-656, December.
    18. Bertsch, Valentin & Hall, Margeret & Weinhardt, Christof & Fichtner, Wolf, 2016. "Public acceptance and preferences related to renewable energy and grid expansion policy: Empirical insights for Germany," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 465-477.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:fuzodm:v:23:y:2024:i:2:d:10.1007_s10700-023-09416-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.